Handicapping vs Money Management

I'm new here (but not new to the game) and I'm guessing that this topic has previously been discussed here...but here goes anyway
In my humble opinion I'm a better handicapper than I am a money manager...
If you have a selection that is going off at better than 4-1 and the actual odds are higher than your "fair odds" line... which betting strategy do you subscribe too??....win/place or spreading in the exotics??
For me I tend to do better with win/place bets...I have found that to many times my key horse opinion was good but that I either spread to far in the exotics or did not spread far enough.
I think what I'm trying to say here is that the risk/reward ratio is usually better with a win/place wager than with an exotic...if you spread to far then you need to weigh the risk of not getting a 4-1 return...if you don't spread far enough then you need to weigh the risk of getting no return

Any thoughts from any of you successful money managers???

wrong turn, Dave

paceadvantage.com is that way ------->

make sure the BET THE OVERLAY parrot (among others) gets in there

tfm,
Not sure what you are saying ..??
My question is not whether to bet overlays vs underlays... but rather how to more effectively make money in how one bets their selections.

[hockey2315]

It's just all about finding the value in that race. . . Sometimes a horse will be thrown in every exacta box but not alot of win money will be on it. . . Sometimes, like when alot of barn money is bet on a horse, the exotics are way higher than the win prices. . . You also should just bet what you feel you have an edge with. If you know you like one horse to win but aren't sure about the horses to use underneath, why bet exotics and risk not capitalizing on the winner?

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Payson Dave

I'm new here and I'm guessing that this topic has previously been discussed here...but here goes anyway
In my humble opinion I'm a better handicapper than I am a money manager...
If you have a selection that is going off at better than 4-1 and the actual odds are higher than your "fair odds" line... which betting strategy do you subscribe too??....win/place or spreading in the exotics??
For me I tend to do better with win/place bets...I have found that to many times my key horse opinion was good but that I either spread to far in the exotics or did not spread far enough.
I think what I'm trying to say here is that the risk/reward ratio is usually better with a win/place wager than with an exotic...if you spread to far then you need to weigh the risk of not getting a 4-1 return...if you don't spread far enough then you need to weigh the risk of getting no return

Any thoughts from any of you successful money managers???

1. Bet to win.
2. As ratio of actual vs fair increases, bet more.
3. Forget place wagering.
4. Exotics... different topic.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

It's just all about finding the value in that race. . . Sometimes a horse will be thrown in every exacta box but not alot of win money will be on it. . . Sometimes, like when alot of barn money is bet on a horse, the exotics are way higher than the win prices. . . You also should just bet what you feel you have an edge with. If you know you like one horse to win but aren't sure about the horses to use underneath, why bet exotics and risk not capitalizing on the winner?

hockey,
Very well said. Value is the key.
Sometimes (myself included), greed gets in the way.
Bet what you feel you have the edge with.
Sometimes, it's best to not spread on the unknowns.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by merasmag

i am just getting more sophisicated in my betting when it comes to exotics, but as to anything else my mantra is still a winner is better than a tear up

I'd venture to say that you may also be a fan of my betting strategy.

I take $50 to the track, and put $15 into the machine and get a betting voucher. I then spend the other $35 on beer.

Then, I bet that I am going to be completely wasted.

It's a no-lose situation, because even if you drop the other $15 on bad horses....who cares? You're already too drunk to be mad about it.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

I'd venture to say that you may also be a fan of my betting strategy.

I take $50 to the track, and put $15 into the machine and get a betting voucher. I then spend the other $35 on beer.

Then, I bet that I am going to be completely wasted.

It's a no-lose situation, because even if you drop the other $15 on bad horses....who cares? You're already too drunk to be mad about it.

I think you need to publish a book with this strategy

it's simple

BET THE OVERLAY

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

it's simple

BET THE OVERLAY

No schit
????do you understand the risk vs reward assessment and return on investment??? exotics have greater rewards but also have greater risks...speading in the exotics reduces the risk but also lowers the ROI...
I was looking for comments on different stategies for better ROI over the long run...

Ok, guys, he's not asking HOW to pick a winner(s). He's asking what to do after he's done that. Stop telling him to bet an overlay.

I've been around here a short amount of time, but it seems like most guys around here play multi-race wagers and reduce their level of risk by covering. There's a good thread on multi-race wagering that BTW weighed in on called SA Pick 6 carryover, or something to that effect. There are some good lessons in that.

As far as money management goes, from a basic level what I would suggest is figuring out exactly what your bankroll is and exactly how much you can afford to wager when you do play. So, if you have $10,000 per year bankroll and you play 100 times a year, you can plan on having, on average $100 every day you play. This is helpful because it tells you what types of wagers you can play consistently and, realistically, have a chance of success. If one has $100 to play when he/she wagers, they are not pick 6 players most likely...more like rolling Pk 3 and Pk 4. Maybe not even that depending on the aversion to risk a player has personally.

Also, what I think you might be hinting at with money management is the notion of changing the amount bet depending on your position as you go along. For instance, some folks say if you're losing you should bet more to make up for what you lost when you eventually do win. This is suspect, but some folks subscribe to the theory that, at some point, they're "due." I say baloney, every race is a new set of circumstances, you could go on forever and keep picking a number based on handicapping and still have relatively little success. In other words, I don't think it's as analogous to flipping a coin and, over time, having heads and tails come up an equal number of times.

My latest money management strategy?? Quit when I'm ahead!! And play within my bankroll. Or at least, when I'm ahead, don't bet it all back. If anything, I've learned that betting back most or all of the amount that I'm ahead using aggressive bets usually ends up being unprofitable. For what it's worth...

I've heard BTW say before that it's one thing to be a good handicapper and another thing to be a good horseplayer. So, I know he's got "opinions" on the topic. Should be a good thread.

[hockey2315]

In reference to the bankroll comment. . . I've read that you should play 2% of your bankroll on a given race. . . That might not work for everyone though

[SentToStud]

I'll make one comment and ask one wuestion.

If you look to bet horses whose actual odds exceed your "fair" odds, that's the right thing to do. That's not enough. you must wager more as the actual exceed fair by a greater margin. For example, if you think a horse's fair odds are 5-1 and it's going off at 7-1, you may make your standard wager, say $10. But if that same horse is going off at 8-1 or 10-1, you really need to wager more, perhaps $12 or $15. What's important is that when you have a perceived advantage, you really need to wager more as that advantage grows.

Why does anyone ever bet to place?

Originally Posted by merasmag

i am just getting more sophisicated in my betting when it comes to exotics, but as to anything else my mantra is still a winner is better than a tear up

Pretty ballsy statement. May we quote you on this?

[ceejay]

Dave,

IMO, Money management is at least 50% of the handicapping game. I always include win $ on my tickets @4-1, and depending on pools sometimes WP. I let the races and my understanding of them dictate exotics. If I have an opinion for place/show overlays I play EX/TRI's. I Often play AB/ABCD/ABCDE $18 tri and AB/ABCDE ex. I NEVER put short priced fav's in the 3-spot. If I don't have opinion for place/show overlays I might try to hook up P3/4's, P3's with <=1 fav, P4's with <=2 favs. If I can't do either multi-race or intrarace I settle for straight pools.

Hope this helps.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

I'll make one comment and ask one wuestion.

If you look to bet horses whose actual odds exceed your "fair" odds, that's the right thing to do. That's not enough. you must wager more as the actual exceed fair by a greater margin. For example, if you think a horse's fair odds are 5-1 and it's going off at 7-1, you may make your standard wager, say $10. But if that same horse is going off at 8-1 or 10-1, you really need to wager more, perhaps $12 or $15. What's important is that when you have a perceived advantage, you really need to wager more as that advantage grows.

Why does anyone ever bet to place?

I pretty much agree with STS's advice, but I'd qualify it somewhat:

1. Even if you perceive an overlay, you'd better have a good reason why the other bettors are "wrong". That is, what is it they are over- or under-estimating?

2. You should be betting less on longshots than on favs. Yeah, that's a "duh" to some, but others think in terms of flat-betting every race, which is a big mistake from a risk standpoint.

--Dunbar

[westcoastinvader]

Why does anyone ever bet to place?


I know of lots of folks who got started betting $2 to win, and $5 to place each race.

And, not necessarily on the same horse.

It's a fun way to have action, a good chance of collecting some tickets each day, and not lose more that $63 on a 9 race card in a worst case scenario. Yes, the opportunity to make "big bucks" is remote unless one runs the table, but it still can make for a fun......and profitable....afternoon.

If one wants to "stretch it out" from the $7 per race, going with a 3 horse quinella box can be OK for the $6 wager.....where offered.

If I've got a horse I really like that is NOT the favorite, it's very common for me to bet it solidly with a backup place wager.......if I'm convinced it's gonna be on the board. I do it most often when I totally discount the favorite. (edit: but I DO a double check glance at the place pool before making the wager, just to make certain it seems worthwhile.........and I define "worthwhile" for a backup place bet as recovering 50% or more of my win wager should the horse finish 2nd).

Last month, or possibly in December, a horse claimed from up here went down and ran in SoCal. She was made the favorite, and based upon my following up here, I completely tossed from the race. She ran out of the $$ and I cashed a nice Win and Place on my selection.

Originally Posted by merasmag

btw, someone with 16 posts has not yet earned the right to criticize me---unless we know u as someone else...hmmmmmm

Criticizing? Not me sister. I'm just a little envious that I didn't pen a pearl of wisdom like " a winner is better than a tear up."

P.S. Are you and Ronnie "Woo Woo" tight?

[Thunder Gulch]

I've read a lot of interesting material on the subject, but I can't claim to have a definitive system. I like the theories that say the size of the wager should correlate to your perceived edge and your chance of winning. If you have a large edge, but only a 5% chance of cashing, it's impossible to stick with the program.